yes, vaccination against polio has nothing to do with its eradication in most of the world. Except in the countries where the influential tell everyone else that the vaccine is a conspiracy to kill kids. In those places kids suffocate or are paralysed due to polio.

My son is about to turn two, and we will do his first MMR in a couple of months. We did a very delayed schedule due to a severe reaction to rotavirus.

My doctor's office offers the MMR combined with chicken pox (ProQuad) but I will be splitting them up, as my family has a history of seizures, and combining the two apparently doubles the risk of febrile seizures.

Haven't changed my mind about the mmr at all and glad went for the single vaccine. How many millions of pounds have the British government paid out in vaccine damage compensation in the last few years = several.

@skygirls - Hi Sky, I think I would go for the MMR so that your DS1 has the full complement of mumps. My DS had singles 2xs for Measles and Rubella, and 1 single mumps then there was no more single mumps vaccine. So that he had 2 mumps I had to do the MMR - which means that he has had 3 doses of Measles and Rubella, and 2 doses of Mumps. Apparently this is fine - as the body does not react to the additional doses of Measles and Rubella if there is already immunity. Does anyone have further info on this ?

Just wondering.... My DS1 had singles of rubella and measles but no mumps because of no vaccine. Then at 3.5 years, gave him an MMR. So he's had 2x measles, 2x rubella but only 1x mumps.

The GP reckons I should give him another MMR to cover for the mumps. I still haven't done this but am reading this thread to give me clarity. I don't want him to catch mumps, but really feel another MMR is a bit ott.

Hi - I did not change my mind about the MMR vaccine as I was adamant that I would give my DS (now 13) the singles. I did the whole lot except for the last mumps, which I could not get as the company making MUMVAX had stopped production. So a year ago, I took the plunge and let my DS have the MMR so he would have the additional MUMPs element. He was and is absolutely fine. No side effects or anything, BUT I was annoyed that I was effectively forced down this route. I am pro vaccine just not pro MMR. However, I have stopped worrying about the risks of getting MUMPs for a boy. I don't plan to give him a second MMR booster as he has had singles x2 for measles and Rubellas and 1x single for the Mumps and 1x MMR. Does anyone out there think that I need to administer a second MMR...

1. In 1949-1958 measles cases rise (on figures for the previous decade), and then remain much the same for the next decade (1959-1968) at about 4 million cases. The deaths however fall, initially by 70% then again by 47% of this already much reduced number. What could have happened? Could the fact that the NHS and the Welfare State were created in 1948. Suddenly you have health care for all, free at the point of use. So deaths, unsurprisingly fall when free health care is available. Note, however that the number of deaths in the decade 1959-1968 were still 865 and cases were over 4 million.

2. Then in 1969-1978 the cases fall dramatically from 4 million to just shy of 1.5 million and the deaths fall too, though the rate of deaths falls by a much smaller amount. What happened to cause this dramatic fall in measles cases? When was the measles vaccine introduced? That'd be 1968, wouldn't it? In the following decade 1979-1988 there was again a drop in measles cases, as the vaccination programme proved effective.

3. In the decade 1989-1998 cases and deaths both fell again, from 837,424 to 106,210. What happenned in 1988? Well, the MMR vaccine was introduced. The deaths in fell from 140 to just 18, though it is worth noting that the death rate remained almost exactly the same (though admittedly, thanks to vaccination, the numbers are getting pretty small by now).

4. In the decade 1999-2008 cases fell again (good old vaccination) to "just" 29,694 cases and a mere eight deaths, which is actually a rise in the death rate but the figures are so low I'd hate to draw any conclusions.

What the figures are going to look like for 2009-2018, I will be interested to see.

Yes amazingmumof6, a case of the pot calling the kettle black I think! It still comes down, then, to me risking my child to protect you and I have a huge problem with this. You weren't at risk due to multiple oversights, just two oversights, that of your mum and that of yourself. Why should I be risking my child to deal with these oversights.

Rightly or wrongly I'm not worried about the diseases and call me irresponsible or selfish or both I'm not risking my child for someone else so I've not changed my mind bout mmr, I was never going to do it (nothing to do with Wakefield) and I'm still not.

and precisely, that is the problem, that we sometimes don't know or even if vaxed we don't think we could be not immune!

ironic or not I thought I was vaxed as that is what my mum remembered originally! the blood test only checks for rubella, so it never occurred to anyone to check for measles - why would I have? I though I was immune!

so when I found about that problem I was furious at the whole situation, but I wasn't blaming the child! so no need to be catty!

interesting how you picked upon the "ironic" thing rather than the fact that I could have lost a child, potentially, due to multiple oversights and how terrible it was to go through that. well done you (!)

I had the MMR last Friday, just to be safe, if there's a next time (pg) and anyway to protect others as well as myself and my immediate family!